Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

2024.09.11 16:18:55 +0530 M/s. Paragon Industries Vs. Sri Penna Polymer Products Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. EX-PARTE JUDGMENT
1. The brief facts of the present case as stated are that the plaintiff is sole proprietorship firm which is engaged in business of manufacturing and supplying plastic goods and plastic raw material since 1994. The defendant no.1 is a company engaged in the business of selling quality assured water tanks. It is stated that the defendant no.2 (Managing Director of defendant no.1 company), met the proprietor of the plaintiff firm in the last week of March 2018 and enquired about the products of the plaintiff and requested the plaintiff to send some sample of its products. On request and representation of defendant no. 2, the plaintiff sent samples via courier to the defendant. It is further stated that after receiving the samples and after attaining satisfaction regarding the quality of the plaintiff's products, the defendant no.1 started placing frequent orders with the plaintiff and since 2018, they have been in business relations with the plaintiff and is a regular purchaser of the plaintiffs products. 1.2 It is further stated that on 29.06.2018, the defendant no.1 made an advance payment of Rs.8.378/- to the plaintiff and placed an order of Rs.8,378/-. Thereafter, the defendants have been placing various orders with the plaintiff on credit basis and have been making payment either in advance or after receiving the products in parts. The defendants placed their last order with the plaintiff firm on 09.11.2020 and that the orders were placed on credit basis hence, there was a total due of Rs.1,42,597/- and the plaintiff requested the defendant no.2 to clear all the outstanding dues. The defendant no.2 assured and promised that NEHA MITTAL MITTAL Date:
2024.09.11 16:19:03 +0530 M/s. Paragon Industries Vs. Sri Penna Polymer Products Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. they will make payments in two installments and in order to show their bonafide, on 11.11.2020, the defendant no.1 paid an amount of Rs.30,000/- and further promised that they shall be clearing the total outstanding dues of the plaintiff. Thereafter, in the month of December 2020, the plaintiff requested the defendants to clear the outstanding dues, however, the defendant no. 2 again sought sometime to clear the remaining dues and the plaintiff in good faith and keeping the future business relationship gave 15 days time to clear the outstanding dues of Rs. 1,12,597/-. It is further stated that in the month of January 2021 after several reminders and follow ups of the plaintiff, the defendant no.1 instead of making full payment of Rs.1,12.597/- paid an amount of Rs.50,000/- to the plaintiff and further sought time to clear the remaining dues of Rs.62,597/-. 1.3 It is further stated that the plaintiff has not received the outstanding payment from the defendants and running from pillar to post to recover the remaining payment. The plaintiff is trying to recover its legitimate outstanding dues from the defendants but all the efforts of the plaintiff have become futile as no payment has been made by them after 23.01.2021. The defendants have deliberately and malafidely given false assurances with the sole motive to cheat, defraud and harass the plaintiff with prior knowledge that the defendants were not going to clear the dues of the defendants.
1.4 It is further stated that the plaintiff through its counsel has issued a legal demand notice dated 03.08.2021 calling upon the defendants to pay the amount of Rs. 62,597/-.

However, despite due service of the said legal demand notice NEHA MITTAL MITTAL Date:

2024.09.11 16:19:14 +0530 M/s. Paragon Industries Vs. Sri Penna Polymer Products Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. dated 03.08.2021, the defendants have failed to make the payment. Hence, the present suit has been filed.
2024.09.11 16:19:21 +0530 M/s. Paragon Industries Vs. Sri Penna Polymer Products Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

7. The testimony of plaintiff has remained unrebutted and uncontroverted as the defendants failed to cross-examine the plaintiff despite opportunity. The averments made by the plaintiff have been duly proved by way of evidence affidavit Ex.PW-1/A and documents Ex.PW-1/1, Ex.PW-1/2, Ex.PW-1/4 to Ex.PW- 1/6, Ex.PW-1/8, Ex.PW-1/9 and Mark-A. The liability of the defendants towards the plaintiff stands corroborated from the ledger account Ex.PW-1/6 and bills/invoices Ex.PW-1/2 and Ex.PW-1/4. There is no reason to disbelieve PW-1 and the documents tendered in evidence by him. The plaintiff has filed the suit with the period of limitation. The transactions between the parties also took place within the jurisdiction of this court. Thus, this Court has territorial jurisdiction to try the present case. The plaintiff is, thus, entitled to recovery of sum of Rs.62,597/- from the defendants.